NationStates Jolt Archive

According to a guard, the detainees like not getting to see each other and being cramped in a small concrete cell for 22 hours a day. They also like being handcuffed through a slot when they need to move around the camp. They used to live in a more communal setting where they ate meals together and excercised together and were outside their cells for as much as half the day. But, apparently they didn't like that and prefer "having their own apartment". There is only one word for this: sick. Not to mention that these detainees shouldn't be there and are only there because China called them terrorists.

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070203/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/guantanamo_harder_time)

GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba - Abdul Helil Mamut's good behavior earned him a spot in a medium-security compound at the Guantanamo Bay prison, where he slept in a barracks, shared leisurely meals with other prisoners and could spend more than half the day in an outdoor recreation area.

But in December, the detainee was among dozens transferred from Camp 4 to the maximum-security Camp 6, the newest section of Guantanamo Bay's military prison.

Now Mamut, an ethnic Uighur from China captured in Pakistan, spends all but two hours a day isolated in his cell. He eats and prays by himself. His only recreation comes in a concrete courtyard surrounded by high walls, separated from other prisoners by a chain-link fence.

The U.S. government says the unit provides detainees with more private and comfortable quarters.

But Mamut and other Uighur prisoners complain their days are now filled with "infinite tedium and loneliness," said Sabin Willett, an attorney for the men, in an affidavit filed in a Washington court.

"All expressed a desperate desire for sunlight, fresh air and someone to speak to," Willett wrote after a January visit to the prison, located on the U.S. military base in southeastern Cuba, where the U.S. holds nearly 400 men suspected of links to al-Qaida or the Taliban.

Wells Dixon, who also represents Uighurs held at Guantanamo, predicted the lack of human interaction in Camp 6 will cause detainees to lose their grip on reality.

"It will very soon become an insane asylum," he told The Associated Press in a phone interview after he returned from the base in January.

The military, however, says Camp 6 has improved the lives of detainees

A guard at Camp 6, an Army sergeant whose name cannot be disclosed under military rules, insisted that the prisoners prefer the new air-conditioned cells and the privacy.

"It's kind of like having their own apartment," he said.

Camp 6 houses about 160 men — more than a third of the total at Guantanamo — and is similar to the highest-security U.S. prisons, even though no one at the prison has been convicted.

When the first detainees arrived in the new unit in December, they found on their bunks two pieces of baklava — a sweet pastry common in the Middle East — to welcome them to their new quarters, according to one prison official.

Originally, Camp 6 was going to be more like Camp 4, with detainees allowed to congregate in a common area and share meals. But the commander of the detention center, Navy Rear Adm. Harry B. Harris, said that plan changed after 10 detainees attacked guards in Camp 4 last May and three prisoners committed suicide in June in Camp 1.

"Our understanding of the detainees improved and evolved," Harris said.

In Camp 6, guards handcuff detainees through a slot in the steel door before escorting them to the recreation area.

"They never touch another living thing," Willett said. "They never see, smell, or touch plants, soil, the sea or any creature, except insects."

Willett said he does not know why Mamut, who is about 30, or the other Uighurs were moved out of Camp 4. The military will not discuss individual detainees or decisions about their custody — but officials say tight security is warranted in all cases.

"I firmly believe that the detainee population that we have right now is literally still at war with us," said Army Col. Wade Dennis, the detention center warden. "We have to be constantly vigilant."

Willett believes Mamut does not deserve to be in a high-security section, saying he is among the more than 100 detainees slated for release or transfer from Guantanamo.

Uighurs have been accused by China of leading a violent Islamic separatist movement in the western province of Xinjiang, though their supporters say Beijing uses claims of terrorism as an excuse to crack down on peaceful pro-independence sentiment.

Under U.S. law, they cannot be deported to China because of concern they could face political persecution. Five Uighurs were sent to Albania last year, but other countries have been unwilling to accept the 17 or so remaining in Guantanamo.

Camp 6 was built for $37 million by KBR, a subsidiary of Houston-based Halliburton Co. The military has transferred prisoners there from other parts of the detention center, including from Camps 1, 2 and 3, where detainees were held in steel mesh cells that allowed them to easily communicate with each other but also left guards vulnerable to being spat upon or splashed with other bodily fluids.

Another unit, Camp 5, is reserved for the least compliant and "high value" detainees, who are also kept in individual, solid-wall cells and also allowed outside for only 2 hours a day of recreation in an enclosed area.

Camp 4, where detainees could spend 12-14 hours a day outside and could congregate freely, now holds about 35 prisoners, down from about 180 at the time of the attack on guards in May. Harris said it will never return to its previous size.

Guantanamo Bay concentration camp is a sick, disgusting Human Rights violation and ultimately what the United States of America nowadays stand for.

Look on the bright side. At least now they've got some privacy to jack off.

Look on the bright side. At least now they've got some privacy to jack off.
lol

Guantanamo Bay concentration camp is a sick, disgusting Human Rights violation and ultimately what the United States of America nowadays stand for.

Nowadays? It's what they've stood for for half a century now.

In any case, I resent my inclusion in the poll.

Look on the bright side. At least now they've got some privacy to jack off.

That was in poor taste, DCD. Shame on you.

Guantanamo Bay will hopefully be shut down by the Dems eventually. At least I really hope it will be, because otherwise the Dems will have proven me correct in being no different from the Repubs, which right now I'm really hoping isn't true.

According to a guard, the detainees like not getting to see each other and being cramped in a small concrete cell for 22 hours a day. They also like being handcuffed through a slot when they need to move around the camp. They used to live in a more communal setting where they ate meals together and excercised together and were outside their cells for as much as half the day. But, apparently they didn't like that and prefer "having their own apartment". There is only one word for this: sick. Not to mention that these detainees shouldn't be there and are only there because China called them terrorists.

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070203/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/guantanamo_harder_time)

This crap makes me ashamed to be an American. :(

This crap makes me ashamed to be an American. :(

It should.

winning hearts and minds huh?

In any case, I resent my inclusion in the poll.


I now know what option I'm voting for. :D

winning hearts and minds huh?
"Satan, laughing, spreads his wings" Black Sabbath - Warpigs

I now know what option I'm voting for. :D

What a richard.

Guantanamo Bay concentration camp is a sick, disgusting Human Rights violation and ultimately what the United States of America nowadays stand for.

Sadly, Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hicks) is all too complicit too.

Look on the bright side. At least now they've got some privacy to jack off.Except they prolly get too little food & excercise to get it up...

Nowadays? It's what they've stood for for half a century now.

Sadly correct

In any case, I resent my inclusion in the poll.

I would be as well.

the fact that Guantanamo has not been closed down yet is sickening enough.

As many will know, I'm not crazy on human rights, but this is genuinely wrong. What is worse is that the entire "Civilised West" appears to be complicit to Guantanamo Bay in some way.

As a legal technicality, the detainment of unlawful combatants is valid under international law. Pirates operating on international waters are similar: they are enemies of humanity in general. Unlawful combatants are NOT protected by the Geneva Convention, and are not entitled to prisoner of war status. As far as they're actual Islamic foreign fighters or terrorists, it's just a public service to humanity in general to detain (or execute) them, according to the international laws of war.

Sort of reminds me of executions of foreign fighters fighting in the Communist forces in the Spanish civil war. It was legal, and in retrospect, acceptable. (Just think if foreigners came into your country and wanted to use force to influence the politics of your country.)

But the problem is here: the detainment is illegal under U.S. law. The United States Constitution and international treaties the U.S. has ratified require the "due process". It's subverting the rule of law and betraying one's own ideals. Not really internationally enforceable - Soviets were the main proponents of "human rights", and we know how they fared - but in U.S. politics, enforceable with new legistlation and impeachment of the responsible officials. I can't see how the courts and the legal profession in general took it so mildly, when the military or executive did this mad power grab.

The fact is that in several cases, bandits have kidnapped innocent men and sold them to Americans as "terrorists", and Americans were wide-eyed enough to believe them. This is what regularly happens when you give up judicial powers to military kangaroo courts and secret "intelligence organizations". Maybe there isn't a indisputable paragraph banning Guantanamo in the constitution, but it's bad government nevertheless.

Good. My bloody roommate was getting annoying with all his crying.

He's eleven, you see.

I'd rather spend a year at Guantanamo than a month at any of the Supermax prisons here, especially Colorado. In any case, isolation of prisoners is standard.

Good. They are no better than animals.

I'm all for locking people up and throwing away the key.... as long as someone can prove that they pose a threat. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to happen as often as it should.

Good. They are no better than animals.

:rolleyes:

Good. The fact that random people that are unlikely to be terrorists are being tortured makes me feel safe regardless of the government I voted for being more interested in torturing random people than in actually making me safer.

Fixed for accuracy.

Nowadays? It's what they've stood for for half a century now.

In any case, I resent my inclusion in the poll.

I couldn't think of anyone else and you came to mind. Plus, I don't like you. :p

Except they prolly get too little food & excercise to get it up...

American prisons usually give good food...better than the fried cat we get at my high school. I think Michael Moore even pointed this out in F9/11.

Good. They are no better than animals.

See, humans are animals and therefore cannot be better than themselves. And if you are racistly referring to non-human animals, they are much better than this. You can't even say use the word civilized, because barbarians wouldn;t do this and it is a product of civilization.

Generalizations about all Americans being in agreement with the policies at
Guantanamo Bay is unfair at best. I am American and would make changes if I could. So I don't think I should feel obligated to take the blame for what others are doing. Hopefully when Bush is replaced in 2008 the new President will make some sweeping changes.

Generalizations about all Americans being in agreement with the policies at
Guantanamo Bay is unfair at best. I am American and would make changes if I could. So I don't think I should feel obligated to take the blame for what others are doing. Hopefully when Bush is replaced in 2008 the new President will make some sweeping changes.

I don't think most Americans are to blame.

I don't think most Americans are to blame.

That doesn't stop some/most people from blaming America the People for it. Or for anything else.

As for the Bay Base itself:

I frankly don't care what happens to them if they're guilty. They're a vile scourge on the face of humanity, and must be purged -- societally or physically -- for the betterment of humanity.

It's the whole "being guilty" thing that's the problem. Due Process is there for a reason. I don't care what happens to the guilty, but we have to be damn sure they're guilty. That simply isn't happening.

Silly people, of course Guantanamo only imprisons people who are very likely to be terrorists. After all, if they didn't hate the USA and want to destroy it before they were imprisoned., they certainly will now. :rolleyes:

Silly people, of course Guantanamo only imprisons people who are very likely to be terrorists. After all, if they didn't hate the USA and want to destroy it before they were imprisoned., they certainly will now. :rolleyes:

Hey, whatever works, right? :p

Silly people, of course Guantanamo only imprisons people who are very likely to be terrorists. After all, if they didn't hate the USA and want to destroy it before they were imprisoned., they certainly will now. :rolleyes:

You never know...

They MIGHT imprison a sadomasochist.

:p

You never know...

They MIGHT imprison a sadomasochist.

:p
Well, then everybody wins!

Well, then everybody wins!

Guantanamo Bay: Revolutionizing Kink houses everywhere!

It should.

Hey, hey, hey. Don't judge because I'm American. I'm a minor, so I didn't vote for Bush, and I wouldn't even if I was of legal age. For the record, I don't support Bush or his policies.

I couldn't think of anyone else and you came to mind.

Next time think harder.

Plus, I don't like you. :p

Woe is I.

Guantanamo Bay concentration camp is a sick, disgusting Human Rights violation and ultimately what the United States of America nowadays stand for.

Next time, I suggest trying not being a terrorist? It works wonders if you don't want to end up in Gitmo.

The detainees were captured not wearing a uniform, therefore are not entitled to any international law conserning prisoners of war (not like they were ever followed, anyway). Personally, I'd line them up and start shooting them every time an American soldier gets blown up by another terrorist, but that's just me...

Next time, I suggest trying not being a terrorist? It works wonders if you don't want to end up in Gitmo.

The detainees were captured not wearing a uniform, therefore are not entitled to any international law conserning prisoners of war (not like they were ever followed, anyway). Personally, I'd line them up and start shooting them every time an American soldier gets blown up by another terrorist, but that's just me...

I never saw anyone so correct in his choice of a name.

1- DUE PROCESS will determine if they were or not terrorists in the first place, not the "you look brown" criteria you so ardently support.

2- Because you'll really do wonders for your situation by acting like a psychopath?

3- And here I thought you were morally superior to the terrorists...

Next time, I suggest trying not being a terrorist? It works wonders if you don't want to end up in Gitmo.

The detainees were captured not wearing a uniform, therefore are not entitled to any international law conserning prisoners of war (not like they were ever followed, anyway). Personally, I'd line them up and start shooting them every time an American soldier gets blown up by another terrorist, but that's just me...

They aren't terrorists. Most aren't. They are just people who are enemies of someone who sold them off to the US, or China sent them off. Some are just random people who were sent by people trying to make a few bucks.

Next time, I suggest trying not being a terrorist? It works wonders if you don't want to end up in Gitmo.

Because you know for absolute certain that they were in fact terrorists? Something noone has been able to prove yet?

The detainees were captured not wearing a uniform, therefore are not entitled to any international law conserning prisoners of war (not like they were ever followed, anyway).

Whether they are subject to the protection of international law regarding the treatment of prisoners of war, they are (or should be) protected by the Declaration of Human Rights.

Personally, I'd line them up and start shooting them every time an American soldier gets blown up by another terrorist, but that's just me...

See, and here I was thinking we were better than the terrorists. You know, the "But he hit me first." defence only works in 6-year-old court.

And let's just hope that none of them are innocent, huh? Oh, i forgot, they're all evil Muslims from those sandy countries. They're guilty by default.

And let's just hope that none of them are innocent, huh?
Too late. :headbang:

What a richard.

Since I don't require or care about your approval, that comment doesn't bother me.

:D

Sadly, Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hicks) is all too complicit too.

*sigh* Indeed.

DUE PROCESS will determine if they were or not terrorists in the first place, not the "you look brown" criteria you so ardently support.

Due process, which is only a right if you are an American citizen. And, no, I don't support a "you look brown" criteria.


And here I thought you were morally superior to the terrorists...

To paraphrase one of the answers to the NS issues, violence is the only shared language we have with these scum, IIRC. I never said it was morally superior, indeed, it is sinking to their level. But nonetheless more effective than our current policy.


See, and here I was thinking we were better than the terrorists. You know, the "But he hit me first." defence only works in 6-year-old court.

Again, violence begets violence. It seems to be the only thing they understand, so I say we go ahead and give it to them. It'll cut the cost of running Gitmo at the very least, if we don't have to provide 500 people with meals, shelter, etc. everyday.


Whether they are subject to the protection of international law regarding the treatment of prisoners of war, they are (or should be) protected by the Declaration of Human Rights.

(Know up front, I have no problem with sinking to their level to dispose of terrorists.)

Was Nick Berg protected by the Declaration of Human Rights? IIRC he had his head chopped off with a machete to a chorus of "Allahu Akbar".


Because you know for absolute certain that they were in fact terrorists? Something noone has been able to prove yet?

Can they prove they aren't terrorists? I'm shifting the burden of proof because I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Can they prove they aren't terrorists? I'm shifting the burden of proof because I'd rather be safe than sorry.
:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

That pretty much sums it up.

Can they prove they aren't terrorists? I'm shifting the burden of proof because I'd rather be safe than sorry.

No one can prove a negative.

I can only hope the same criteria is applied to you someday to take you to a gulag, and you, too, can't prove the negative.

Can they prove they aren't terrorists? I'm shifting the burden of proof because I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Can we prove they are? No. If we could, they'd have their damn trials already.

Due process, which is only a right if you are an American citizen. And, no, I don't support a "you look brown" criteria.

So what is your criteria? Bush's say-so? The country they were found in?




To paraphrase one of the answers to the NS issues, violence is the only shared language we have with these scum, IIRC. I never said it was morally superior, indeed, it is sinking to their level. But nonetheless more effective than our current policy.

What about that will make them hate us less? What about your brainwave will make them want to stop destroying us?





Again, violence begets violence. It seems to be the only thing they understand, so I say we go ahead and give it to them. It'll cut the cost of running Gitmo at the very least, if we don't have to provide 500 people with meals, shelter, etc. everyday.

So we should just kill them, because they're dirty terrorists anyway.




(Know up front, I have no problem with sinking to their level to dispose of terrorists.)

So what makes us better than them then? Why are we right to use those tactics and they are wrong? And a "they used it first." response is not adequate.

Was Nick Berg protected by the Declaration of Human Rights? IIRC he had his head chopped off with a machete to a chorus of "Allahu Akbar".

The difference is, the killers of Nick Berg and the other hostages were not the leaders or representative army of a sovereign nation. The US is. And as such, they are accountable for the conditions in which they hold prisoners. They have laws and conventions they need to adhere to. If the killers of those people are found, I expect them to be tried, convicted and sentenced.






Can they prove they aren't terrorists? I'm shifting the burden of proof because I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Well, I'm quite sure at least some of them could, if they were given adequate access to lawyers, documents, daylight etc. But unfortunately, that's not happening. So innocent people are languishing in purgatory, because of a warmongering administration.

Fass! It is all Fass' fault!

Guantanamo Bay concentration camp is a sick, disgusting Human Rights violation and ultimately what the United States of America nowadays stand for.Well, the Europeans do not even have the right to claim that they have not had things many times worse. The Russians had the Gulags, the Germans we all know what they had, the French had prision colonies, the real Death Island, British invented the concentration camp, the Australians had killed most of the natives and forced kids to live in other communties, Japs had as many dead in through their actions then the Nazis did, the Spanish had Cuba and their other holdings, and the list keeps going.

Can they prove they aren't terrorists? I'm shifting the burden of proof because I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Ahhh, so not in uniform, unable to prove a negative = terrorist. Thereby, any American now found outside America not in uniform is now a terrorist. I'll let the firing squads know of the new developments and tell them to stock up on ammo.

Personally, I'd line them up and start shooting them every time an American soldier gets blown up by another terrorist, but that's just me...

Because killing people for the actions of others works :rolleyes:

Well, the Europeans do not even have the right to claim that they have not had things many times worse. The Russians had the Gulags, the Germans we all know what they had, the French had prision colonies, the real Death Island, British invented the concentration camp, the Australians had killed most of the natives and forced kids to live in other communties, Japs had as many dead in through their actions then the Nazis did, the Spanish had Cuba and their other holdings, and the list keeps going.

I work with servicemen/women who worked at Gitmo and things aren't like the disgusting and degrading conditions that many are led to believe. The detainees actually eat better food than the guards and staff. They have special cells where they put the trouble makers and high risk detainees. Now, those who are known for good behavior are sent to cells with fewer other people in them. Also, the guards are not authorized to harm the detainees at all. If a guard struck one, they could be seperated from the Army or Navy. OC spray was authorized but little else.

I work with servicemen/women who worked at Gitmo and things aren't like the disgusting and degrading conditions that many are led to believe. The detainees actually eat better food than the guards and staff. They have special cells where they put the trouble makers and high risk detainees. Now, those who are known for good behavior are sent to cells with fewer other people in them. Also, the guards are not authorized to harm the detainees at all. If a guard struck one, they could be seperated from the Army or Navy. OC spray was authorized but little else.

Well that just makes me feel a whole lot better about people being locked away in a foreign country's prison for years without being charged or a trial or due process. They get to eat better food than the people paid to keep them locked up. :rolleyes:

Because killing people for the actions of others works :rolleyes:As for quoting my post the point I was making you cannot asses a situation for which you cannot have certified knowledge of what the hell they are doing. As well, Gitmo is more of an intermient camp.

Well that just makes me feel a whole lot better about people being locked away in a foreign country's prison for years without being charged or a trial or due process. They get to eat better food than the people paid to keep them locked up. :rolleyes:

Believe me as I'm sure you know there are FAR worse prisons that they could be in. The Scandinvans is right about prison systems in the past, not to mention other countries around the world as well. At least they're not being gased or lined up against walls and being shot.

Well, the Europeans do not even have the right to claim that they have not had things many times worse. The Russians had the Gulags, the Germans we all know what they had, the French had prision colonies, the real Death Island, British invented the concentration camp, the Australians had killed most of the natives and forced kids to live in other communties, Japs had as many dead in through their actions then the Nazis did, the Spanish had Cuba and their other holdings, and the list keeps going.

That makes things so much better, doesn't it...

Believe me as I'm sure you know there are FAR worse prisons that they could be in. The Scandinvans is right about prison systems in the past, not to mention other countries around the world as well. At least they're not being gased or lined up against walls and being shot.

Again, the fact that there are worse places that they could be does not ameliorate the simple fact that what is happening at Gitmo is wrong. Simple as that.

Hardly anything's right these days. The one thing I'm hoping is that I'm not ordered to be stationed at Gitmo. Everyone I know who was stationed there hated it greatly.

So what is your criteria? Bush's say-so? The country they were found in?

My money's on his criteria being the say-so of the Pakistani warlords who sold them to the US Forces for five grand per head.

Well, the Europeans do not even have the right to claim that they have not had things many times worse. The Russians had the Gulags, the Germans we all know what they had, the French had prision colonies, the real Death Island, British invented the concentration camp, the Australians had killed most of the natives and forced kids to live in other communties, Japs had as many dead in through their actions then the Nazis did, the Spanish had Cuba and their other holdings, and the list keeps going.

Actually the British did not invent the concentration camp. It was the Spanish. Imagine my surprise as I had always thought it was the British as well.

However the difference is that the Spanish did it to Cubans who were loyal to Spain. To create safe areas.

The British did it to confine their enemies.

http://picard.montclair.edu/witness/Reconcentrados.html

Well, the Europeans do not even have the right to claim that they have not had things many times worse.
Mind you, I never did. But you're using the right tense - those times are gone. This is the present.

I am fully aware of my country's history and past and believe that I have learned a valuable lesson from what has happened last century.

But I have the right, nay, the obligation to voice my concern, disgust, and rejection of what the U.S. is doing in their concentration camps and secret prisons around the world.

Because, if they ever had any moral high-ground, this current administration has pretty much done everything to lose that.

No U.S. citizen should dare point fingers, because what's going on is happening in their name and they're all responsible for it, directly or indirectly.

Well, the Europeans do not even have the right to claim that they have not had things many times worse.
A couple of years ago, I went completely ape-shit and threw a chair at my little sister. Admiddedly at the time she was being a complete prick and asking for it, but I, even today, am deeply asamed of myself for what I did. Yet, despite this, I would still have the right to tell anyone, and to believe, that throwing chairs at people in a rage is deeply wrong.

The Russians had the Gulags, the Germans we all know what they had, the French had prision colonies, the real Death Island, British invented the concentration camp, the Australians had killed most of the natives and forced kids to live in other communties, Japs had as many dead in through their actions then the Nazis did, the Spanish had Cuba and their other holdings, and the list keeps going.
And the USA has Gitmo. Does two wrongs make a right?

And the USA has Gitmo. Does two wrongs make a right?

No but three lefts do

Well, the Europeans do not even have the right to claim that they have not had things many times worse. The Russians had the Gulags, the Germans we all know what they had, the French had prision colonies, the real Death Island, British invented the concentration camp, the Australians had killed most of the natives and forced kids to live in other communties, Japs had as many dead in through their actions then the Nazis did, the Spanish had Cuba and their other holdings, and the list keeps going.

And yet despite those examples the current administration has failed to learn from them..............

Mind you, I never did. But you're using the right tense - those times are gone. This is the present.

I am fully aware of my country's history and past and believe that I have learned a valuable lesson from what has happened last century.

But I have the right, nay, the obligation to voice my concern, disgust, and rejection of what the U.S. is doing in their concentration camps and secret prisons around the world.

Because, if they ever had any moral high-ground, this current administration has pretty much done everything to lose that.

No U.S. citizen should dare point fingers, because what's going on is happening in their name and they're all responsible for it, directly or indirectly.

As an American, I gotta say...you're absolutely right.

Due process, which is only a right if you are an American citizen. And, no, I don't support a "you look brown" criteria.

Well the wording there is slightly wrong> I'm sure most nations had some due process, which is a right for everyone.




To paraphrase one of the answers to the NS issues, violence is the only shared language we have with these scum, IIRC. I never said it was morally superior, indeed, it is sinking to their level. But nonetheless more effective than our current policy.

Yes because they're all terrorists that want to blow up America. There is obviously hard line evidence that they were evil terrorists. How about a policy where a war caught actual enemies than catch anyone and accuse them of being an enemy?

(Know up front, I have no problem with sinking to their level to dispose of terrorists.)
It's okay because they're different right? :rolleyes:

Was Nick Berg protected by the Declaration of Human Rights? IIRC he had his head chopped off with a machete to a chorus of "Allahu Akbar".
I'll give you that.


Can they prove they aren't terrorists? I'm shifting the burden of proof because I'd rather be safe than sorry.

Safe than sorry? You'll be sorry as you slowly sign your rights away, to be safer.

Safe than sorry? You'll be sorry as you slowly sign your rights away, to be safer.

QFT

I'd rather risk death than have my freedom taken away

Good. They are no better than animals.

are you trying to get some-one to flame you?

are you trying to get some-one to flame you?

You have to ask? With a name like his? Get a grip.

You have to ask? With a name like his? Get a grip.
I did not expect an answer. I'm just saying it's flamebait, because almost everyone here knows that there is a gross human rights violation, and no-one knows if the prisoners are really terrorists, because they did not get a trial.

Fass! It is all Fass' fault!

I'd like to point out that this is incorrectly written. It is commonly mistaken that you don't put «'s» whenever there is an «s» at the end of a word. This is only true if the word is plural.

Example: Fass's house was just naped. ;)
Example: The lemons' yellow citrus taste is typical in all citrus fruit(s).

In the second example, the «s» is not actually needed. :)

I'd like to point out that this is incorrectly written. It is commonly mistaken that you don't put «'s» whenever there is an «s» at the end of a word. This is only true if the word is plural.

Example: Fass's house was just naped. ;)
Example: The lemons' yellow citrus taste is typical in all citrus fruit(s).

In the second example, the «s» is not actually needed. :)
My inner grammar-nazi just learned something! Thanks, mate! :D:D:D

(Interestingly enough, in German the correct form must not have the "s" after the apostrophe.)

My inner grammar-nazi just learned something! Thanks, mate! :D:D:D

(Interestingly enough, in German the correct form must not have the "s" after the apostrophe.)

Although English technically has no "standard" other than in spelling and so you could argue that both are de facto correct because both are used. But, I think most grammar books will agree with me. Even big name magazines like TIME have messed this up. Not that TIME has, but that's my example. :)

Well the wording there is slightly wrong> I'm sure most nations had some due process, which is a right for everyone.

I think we'll need to clarify what each of us means by "due process" before we go any further--I support methods to actually determine whether or not the detainees actually are terrorists, since I hate wasting money as much as the next guy. I just don't support using the civilian justice system for these guys, I would prefer a military tribunal.


Yes because they're all terrorists that want to blow up America. There is obviously hard line evidence that they were evil terrorists. How about a policy where a war caught actual enemies than catch anyone and accuse them of being an enemy?

Catching them planting a bomb somewhere or shooting at our soldiers is reason enough, no? When raids are made and insurgents captured, how are they not the enemy when they are armed, have videotapes of themselves shooting and killing Americans, or, well....you get the idea. And as to imprisoning anyone, you are automatically assuming someone in a position of power would abuse it--given the checks and balances in our government that is highly unlikely.


Safe than sorry? You'll be sorry as you slowly sign your rights away, to be safer.

I can see we're not going to agree on this--I would rather be safer, and I fully believe Gitmo is an operation created and is working for our protection--however ineffective, it is something.

I fully believe Gitmo is an operation created and is working for our protection--however ineffective, it is something.

You just admitted you want this to happen just for kicks.

You just admitted you want this to happen just for kicks.

Not for kicks. For a real purpose, and that is to stop terrorists from killing Americans. When I say it is ineffective, I simply say there are better ways to go about it, but Gitmo is certainly better than nothing.

Not for kicks. For a real purpose, and that is to stop terrorists from killing Americans. When I say it is ineffective, I simply say there are better ways to go about it, but Gitmo is certainly better than nothing.

Let me guess...you support capital punishment as a deterrent as well? Despite the fact that it does not deter people from committing heinous crimes...

You say that all in Gitmo are guilty...then why have people been released?

You want a military tribunal...yet those incarcerated in Gitmo are not military...

If you haven't noticed...the age of the Neocon is breathing its last breath.

There's five thousand reasons why the detainees are being held. Five thousand, per head.

There's five thousand reasons why the detainees are being held. Five thousand, per head.

And all of them begin with "They looked Arab, so we just figured..."

And all of them begin with "They looked Arab, so we just figured..."

Nahhh... all of 'em have the word "dollar" stamped on 'em...

There's five thousand reasons why the detainees are being held. Five thousand, per head.

Shocking huh?

Shocking huh?

It's just the sort of thing I'd've expected from the old Soviet Union - which, I'll add, the US is ressembling more and more with each passing day.

It's just the sort of thing I'd've expected from the old Soviet Union - which, I'll add, the US is ressembling more and more with each passing day.

Why do you think the states that are republican are called Red States?

The irony slays me....

Let me guess...you support capital punishment as a deterrent as well? Despite the fact that it does not deter people from committing heinous crimes...

You say that all in Gitmo are guilty...then why have people been released?

You want a military tribunal...yet those incarcerated in Gitmo are not military...

If you haven't noticed...the age of the Neocon is breathing its last breath.

So a POW camp is doing what it is suppose to do, and thats wrong? I thought during war, POWs can be kept incarcerated indefinately during wartime conditions, as we are in today. A prisoner camp is not suppose to be a four star hotel with comfort, and everything you want at your beck and call. Its a prison camp, where people are incarcerated for commiting crimes, and detainees picked up from combat areas. So far, it doesnt seem to be the "concentration" camp Bleeding hearts purport it to be. Let's compare and contrast a Nazi concentration camp to Gitmo shall we?
Gitmo: Three hot specially prepared meals a day, special Korans, a place with a mark towards Mecca for easy praying, lawyers, Red cross, (or Cresent), TV, medical facilities.
Nazi Concentration camp: watered down soup once in a great while, stale rock hard bread, daily beatings, random executions, starvation, mass murder, cremation ovens, sickening medical experiments, gas chambers, attack dogs, no Red Cross, no lawyers, no Bibles or Torahs, hard labor, routine torture.

Now I really am having a hard time here trying to draw paralelles between Gitmo and a concentration camp.
Also, what makes you so sure they are credible that they are being abused? Did you know that AQ along with other radical muslim organizations make it a point in training to bring up false accusations towards the US and Gitmo, so they can use our own media agianst the war effort? And of course, people like you just eat it up like its God's truth. They know full well what they are doing. Using our media agianst us, and putting us in a negative light. I will not deny the fact that there have been possible abuse cases in the past at a detention camp. However, as it was proven before, most allegation of "abuse" was just made up Bullshit! Remember the stories last year about the alleged Koran flushed down the toilet and the urination on another Koran by a guard at Gitmo? Complete bullshit, but the media ran with it anyway, even thought it turned out to be completely false, and it just an attempt to make Gitmo look even worse, and all it did was incite more hatred and anger in the Muslim world. but you'd rather believe the propaganda they feed you.

Well, in that case, why arent you complaining about the conditions our soldiers, and others who are kidnapped by the insurgents, and then tortured and beheaded on the internet?

The guards are seeing what they can get away with - BECAUSE YOU'RE LETTING THEM. I don't have a boat or lots of money or a plane or helicopter. As much as I think bombings are not justified, AMERICANS need to BLOW UP the prison(s) at Guantanamo Bay. The prisoners have tried killing themselves, so they surely prefer death to their current treatment, so you would be helping them. The guards, whilst they may not deserve to be killed and presumably don't want to be, MUST be if they're in the prison at the time of the blowing up of it - it can't be helped. I'm surprised a so-called "Islamic Terrorist" hasn't blown the place up already.

Just think, if they keep doing what they want and getting away with it, there's no reason for the government to have any worries about locking YOU American citizens and YOUR FAMILIES up in such a place for no reason.

So a POW camp is doing what it is suppose to do, and thats wrong? I thought during war, POWs can be kept incarcerated indefinately during wartime conditions, as we are in today. A prisoner camp is not suppose to be a four star hotel with comfort, and everything you want at your beck and call. Its a prison camp, where people are incarcerated for commiting crimes, and detainees picked up from combat areas. So far, it doesnt seem to be the "concentration" camp Bleeding hearts purport it to be. Let's compare and contrast a Nazi concentration camp to Gitmo shall we?
Gitmo: Three hot specially prepared meals a day, special Korans, a place with a mark towards Mecca for easy praying, lawyers, Red cross, (or Cresent), TV, medical facilities.
Nazi Concentration camp: watered down soup once in a great while, stale rock hard bread, daily beatings, random executions, starvation, mass murder, cremation ovens, sickening medical experiments, gas chambers, attack dogs, no Red Cross, no lawyers, no Bibles or Torahs, hard labor, routine torture.

Now I really am having a hard time here trying to draw paralelles between Gitmo and a concentration camp.
Someone else did something worse than us, therefore what we did is fine, right. So, instead of trying to provide an alibi for a murder we just point to someone who did something even more horrific and we walk free, right. Just because something isn't as bad as it possibly could or has been does not make it right/good/legal.

Also, what makes you so sure they are credible that they are being abused? Did you know that AQ along with other radical muslim organizations make it a point in training to bring up false accusations towards the US and Gitmo, so they can use our own media agianst the war effort? And of course, people like you just eat it up like its God's truth. They know full well what they are doing. Using our media agianst us, and putting us in a negative light. I will not deny the fact that there have been possible abuse cases in the past at a detention camp. However, as it was proven before, most allegation of "abuse" was just made up Bullshit! Remember the stories last year about the alleged Koran flushed down the toilet and the urination on another Koran by a guard at Gitmo? Complete bullshit, but the media ran with it anyway, even thought it turned out to be completely false, and it just an attempt to make Gitmo look even worse, and all it did was incite more hatred and anger in the Muslim world. but you'd rather believe the propaganda they feed you.
Even if they are not being abused they are being imprisoned in conditions similair to a maximum security prison for the "crime" of being out of uniform in a combat zone withou any form of trial to try and find out if they actually are terrorists.

Well, in that case, why arent you complaining about the conditions our soldiers, and others who are kidnapped by the insurgents, and then tortured and beheaded on the internet?
Who says we're not? Also, we have no power or responsibility over those people or their actions, however, these crimes are being commited by those who were elected to represent us so we have a duty to let them know that we would rather they didn't do such things in our name.

*bleat*

Sheep say what now?

Sheep say what now?

LOOK UP.

So a POW camp is doing what it is suppose to do, and thats wrong? I thought during war, POWs can be kept incarcerated indefinately during wartime conditions, as we are in today. A prisoner camp is not suppose to be a four star hotel with comfort, and everything you want at your beck and call. Its a prison camp, where people are incarcerated for commiting crimes, and detainees picked up from combat areas. So far, it doesnt seem to be the "concentration" camp Bleeding hearts purport it to be. Let's compare and contrast a Nazi concentration camp to Gitmo shall we?
Gitmo: Three hot specially prepared meals a day, special Korans, a place with a mark towards Mecca for easy praying, lawyers, Red cross, (or Cresent), TV, medical facilities.
Nazi Concentration camp: watered down soup once in a great while, stale rock hard bread, daily beatings, random executions, starvation, mass murder, cremation ovens, sickening medical experiments, gas chambers, attack dogs, no Red Cross, no lawyers, no Bibles or Torahs, hard labor, routine torture.

Now I really am having a hard time here trying to draw paralelles between Gitmo and a concentration camp.
Also, what makes you so sure they are credible that they are being abused? Did you know that AQ along with other radical muslim organizations make it a point in training to bring up false accusations towards the US and Gitmo, so they can use our own media agianst the war effort? And of course, people like you just eat it up like its God's truth. They know full well what they are doing. Using our media agianst us, and putting us in a negative light. I will not deny the fact that there have been possible abuse cases in the past at a detention camp. However, as it was proven before, most allegation of "abuse" was just made up Bullshit! Remember the stories last year about the alleged Koran flushed down the toilet and the urination on another Koran by a guard at Gitmo? Complete bullshit, but the media ran with it anyway, even thought it turned out to be completely false, and it just an attempt to make Gitmo look even worse, and all it did was incite more hatred and anger in the Muslim world. but you'd rather believe the propaganda they feed you.

Well, in that case, why arent you complaining about the conditions our soldiers, and others who are kidnapped by the insurgents, and then tortured and beheaded on the internet?

A concentration camp is where prisoners are concentrated, so they can be controlled more easily. So Gitmo is a concentration camp. Most people there are just random people or tribal enemies sold for a quick buck. We should treat them, not what they deserve, but what is fair and right. How does AQ control our media? Implants? A lot of unfair human rights violations have occured and still are. There are stories all the time about how the prisoners are treated. They usually don't get lawyers because they are confused and disoriented. They don't know to ask for one. Back home in Central Asia, they aren't guaranteed a lawyer.

A concentration camp is where prisoners are concentrated, so they can be controlled more easily. So Gitmo is a concentration camp. Most people there are just random people or tribal enemies sold for a quick buck. We should treat them, not what they deserve, but what is fair and right. How does AQ control our media? Implants? A lot of unfair human rights violations have occured and still are. There are stories all the time about how the prisoners are treated. They usually don't get lawyers because they are confused and disoriented. They don't know to ask for one. Back home in Central Asia, they aren't guaranteed a lawyer.

You have to admit, though, the term "concentration camp" is being used simply to play on the emotions of the people, as a the KZL's are immediately equated with "Nazi Genocide." I agree with you, technically, Gitmo is a concentration camp, but due to the modern implications of the term, calling Gitmo a KZL simply isn't entirely truthful anymore.

Sheep say what now?

What a truely educated, informative, mature, and intelligent response! I bow down to your genius.

The guards are seeing what they can get away with - BECAUSE YOU'RE LETTING THEM. I don't have a boat or lots of money or a plane or helicopter. As much as I think bombings are not justified, AMERICANS need to BLOW UP the prison(s) at Guantanamo Bay. The prisoners have tried killing themselves, so they surely prefer death to their current treatment, so you would be helping them. The guards, whilst they may not deserve to be killed and presumably don't want to be, MUST be if they're in the prison at the time of the blowing up of it - it can't be helped. I'm surprised a so-called "Islamic Terrorist" hasn't blown the place up already.

Just think, if they keep doing what they want and getting away with it, there's no reason for the government to have any worries about locking YOU American citizens and YOUR FAMILIES up in such a place for no reason.

1. We aren't allowed to go to Cuba.
2. We couldn't get exploives there.
3. There's literally thousands of guards and soldiers there. It's a regular base.
4. Even for foreigners it's not easy to get near it.
5. Even Cubans too...
6. Americans are lazy fucks. Remember, our voter turnout is like 45%...

What a truely educated, informative, mature, and intelligent response! I bow down to your genius.

And your post is any better how?

It was that or calling troll.

Every one of those points are the usual talking points of the neocon supporter. Before you call the usual 'you anti-American' I would like to say that this view is not only limited to the US. I hear the same from people in Europe, South America and East Asia/Oceania.

It always the same meme. It gets tedious. Most people understand that the premise of Gitmo is wrong. No due process is the main issue. As far as I am concerned Islamic terrorists who want to blow me to bits is personal. I have no hesitation to see AQ and the other nutcase dickheads who want to control me to the extent where my life is forfeit taken into custody. If they want a shoot out...bomb the place.

If there are innocents then there is a bit of a moral dilemma. It depends on the situation; if they start to shoot hostages then things will escalate. Thats why we have people who can deal with that kind of situation. It will most likely be a military unit so things could be interesting and there will be friendly fire fatalities. Thats a nightmare. How do I feel about such a situation? I'd mourn the dead civvies but would be quite happy over the deaths of those who want to kill me.

I suspect the same goes for most if not the majority of those in the 'West'.

Oh sorry...its not what those idiots who use the word Liberal as an insult are able to comprehend. It used to be amusing when rightist called me a liberal as in a way I was but not how they understood the term. You know, the usual stuff like freedom of speech, association, transparent and limited government, and of course freedom of thought. All those things the idiots who call me a liberal (the antithesis of the above) they use as a puerile insult.

Like those used by the poster. Basically it was a rant with well worded attacks; noting short of call us/me idiotic.

That is why I posted my comments.

Given your post I would say that you consider yourself to be quite intelligent and most likely of Liberal thought. Maybe you ought to reconsider that? After all every one of the points raised in that post where invective.

Lets just get down to basics shall we?

1 - These peole have been deprived of their liberty without trial, evidence or any sort of public acknowledgement of their so called guilt.

2 - How long before the government decides that they can do this to YOU?

Lets just get down to basics shall we?

1 - These peole have been deprived of their liberty without trial, evidence or any sort of public acknowledgement of their so called guilt.

2 - How long before the government decides that they can do this to YOU?

Padilla.

Hitler was nicer to the jews. Gitmo is a disgrace.

So a POW camp is doing what it is suppose to do, and thats wrong? I thought during war, POWs can be kept incarcerated indefinately during wartime conditions, as we are in today. A prisoner camp is not suppose to be a four star hotel with comfort, and everything you want at your beck and call. Its a prison camp, where people are incarcerated for commiting crimes, and detainees picked up from combat areas. So far, it doesnt seem to be the "concentration" camp Bleeding hearts purport it to be. Let's compare and contrast a Nazi concentration camp to Gitmo shall we?
Gitmo: Three hot specially prepared meals a day, special Korans, a place with a mark towards Mecca for easy praying, lawyers, Red cross, (or Cresent), TV, medical facilities.
Nazi Concentration camp: watered down soup once in a great while, stale rock hard bread, daily beatings, random executions, starvation, mass murder, cremation ovens, sickening medical experiments, gas chambers, attack dogs, no Red Cross, no lawyers, no Bibles or Torahs, hard labor, routine torture.

Now I really am having a hard time here trying to draw paralelles between Gitmo and a concentration camp.
Also, what makes you so sure they are credible that they are being abused? Did you know that AQ along with other radical muslim organizations make it a point in training to bring up false accusations towards the US and Gitmo, so they can use our own media agianst the war effort? And of course, people like you just eat it up like its God's truth. They know full well what they are doing. Using our media agianst us, and putting us in a negative light. I will not deny the fact that there have been possible abuse cases in the past at a detention camp. However, as it was proven before, most allegation of "abuse" was just made up Bullshit! Remember the stories last year about the alleged Koran flushed down the toilet and the urination on another Koran by a guard at Gitmo? Complete bullshit, but the media ran with it anyway, even thought it turned out to be completely false, and it just an attempt to make Gitmo look even worse, and all it did was incite more hatred and anger in the Muslim world. but you'd rather believe the propaganda they feed you.

Well, in that case, why arent you complaining about the conditions our soldiers, and others who are kidnapped by the insurgents, and then tortured and beheaded on the internet?


yea well they ARENT prisoners of war. they arent being HELD as pows. pows are covered under the "quaint" provisions of the geneva conventions. these poor souls arent.

they are guys picked up as possible terrorists (i cant remember the term for them) who are being held without charges, without trial and without ever having served in the army of a country we are at war with. some few are actually alqaeda members some are just kids.

there is no justification for holding any of these men in solitary confinement so brutal that it could lead to insanity.

We aren't even at war. The last declaration of war was 64.5 years ago against Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania.

We aren't even at war. The last declaration of war was 64.5 years ago against Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania.

The US government is at war - against anyone who opposes any of it's actions

Let me guess...you support capital punishment as a deterrent as well?

Damn right. I absolutely support capital punishment and would see it applied to any capital crime. And none of this lethal injection bullshit, we're using the rope.

You say that all in Gitmo are guilty...then why have people been released?

I don't say they are all guilty. But, in the interests of national security, they are to be considered guilty until proven otherwise.

You want a military tribunal...yet those incarcerated in Gitmo are not military...

I already said I'm not going to use the civilian system.

If you haven't noticed...the age of the Neocon is breathing its last breath.

Despite the long list of problems I have with Neocons, the day the likes of you come to power will be the end of freedom, security, and decency. Hell, we're already almost there now.

The US government is at war - against anyone who opposes any of it's actions

Uh no.

Damn right. I absolutely support capital punishment and would see it applied to any capital crime. And none of this lethal injection bullshit, we're using the rope.



I don't say they are all guilty. But, in the interests of national security, they are to be considered guilty until proven otherwise.



I already said I'm not going to use the civilian system.



Despite the long list of problems I have with Neocons, the day the likes of you come to power will be the end of freedom, security, and decency. Hell, we're already almost there now.

I always thought you were innocent until proven guilty...:rolleyes:

I don't say they are all guilty. But, in the interests of national security, they are to be considered guilty until proven otherwise.

Prove to me you're not a terrorist and I might keep on answering your posts.

Damn right. I absolutely support capital punishment and would see it applied to any capital crime. And none of this lethal injection bullshit, we're using the rope.

Yet it does not deter people. Seems you are interested in vengeance rather than justice.

I don't say they are all guilty. But, in the interests of national security, they are to be considered guilty until proven otherwise.


How does that work? They are not guilty but are anyway? Oh yeah...doublethink.

I already said I'm not going to use the civilian system.

Really. So you are going to use military justice against non military persons. Can you spell...doublethink?

Despite the long list of problems I have with Neocons, the day the likes of you come to power will be the end of freedom, security, and decency. Hell, we're already almost there now.

Wow. Its not doublethink. Its idiocy! So...when are you shipping out to Iraq? Either you are too young, too chicken or too fucking stupid.

According to a guard, the detainees like not getting to see each other and being cramped in a small concrete cell for 22 hours a day. They also like being handcuffed through a slot when they need to move around the camp. They used to live in a more communal setting where they ate meals together and excercised together and were outside their cells for as much as half the day. But, apparently they didn't like that and prefer "having their own apartment". There is only one word for this: sick. Not to mention that these detainees shouldn't be there and are only there because China called them terrorists.

Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070203/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/guantanamo_harder_time)

Nice. :rolleyes: This is the American Way right here, guys. :rolleyes:

(btw, sel appa, my new AIM is NSGPancake, but I can't remember your IM name :()

How does that work? They are not guilty but are anyway? Oh yeah...doublethink.

Really. So you are going to use military justice against non military persons. Can you spell...doublethink?

Doublethink is doubleplusgood!

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
WAR IS PEACE
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Doublethink is doubleplusgood!

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
WAR IS PEACE
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

CARROTS ARE THE REAL MEAT!

CARROTS ARE THE REAL MEAT!

We must obey the Party.

>.>
<.<

We must obey the Party.

>.>
<.<

Or else!

Or else!

>.>
<.<

More is Less!

Restrict our freedoms to protect freedom!!

Doubleplus Good!!

Nice. :rolleyes: This is the American Way right here, guys. :rolleyes:

(btw, sel appa, my new AIM is NSGPancake, but I can't remember your IM name :()

yayz! :fluffle:

Doublethink is doubleplusgood!

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
WAR IS PEACE
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

We must obey the Party.

>.>
<.<

Pancake! hehehe :fluffle: :D :fluffle:

Restrict our freedoms to protect freedom!!

Doubleplus Good!!

CALIFORNIA UBER ALLES!


No..wait...I mean...Have some Victory Gin, My Good man!

And your post is any better how?

It is, in fact, because you didn't say anything, therefore I responded to nothing with nothing. You responded to something with nothing, which is immature at best.

Every one of those points are the usual talking points of the neocon supporter. Before you call the usual 'you anti-American' I would like to say that this view is not only limited to the US. I hear the same from people in Europe, South America and East Asia/Oceania.

It always the same meme. It gets tedious.

And? They were still points he was arguing, and not something to dismiss with an "lol, n00b," regardless of if you hear them a lot.

Most people understand that the premise of Gitmo is wrong. No due process is the main issue. As far as I am concerned Islamic terrorists who want to blow me to bits is personal. I have no hesitation to see AQ and the other nutcase dickheads who want to control me to the extent where my life is forfeit taken into custody. If they want a shoot out...bomb the place.

If there are innocents then there is a bit of a moral dilemma. It depends on the situation; if they start to shoot hostages then things will escalate. Thats why we have people who can deal with that kind of situation. It will most likely be a military unit so things could be interesting and there will be friendly fire fatalities. Thats a nightmare. How do I feel about such a situation? I'd mourn the dead civvies but would be quite happy over the deaths of those who want to kill me.

I suspect the same goes for most if not the majority of those in the 'West'.

I would agree with you here.

Like those used by the poster. Basically it was a rant with well worded attacks; noting short of call us/me idiotic.

That is why I posted my comments.

No, he was bringing up good points -- Gitmo =/= Auschwitz. That was what he was saying, and he was, in fact, supporting his argument.

Given your post I would say that you consider yourself to be quite intelligent and most likely of Liberal thought. Maybe you ought to reconsider that? After all every one of the points raised in that post where invective.[/QUOTE]

I do not consider myself to be a genius by any means, or necessarily "liberal," no. And no, they were not railing accusations at all, they were, in fact, good points, that you dismissed simply because you disagreed with it and heard it a lot.

Now, don't get me wrong, what is happening at Gitmo is completely wrong -- I love Due Process, and they're not getting it -- but comparing Gitmo to the Nazi Concentration/Extermination camps is unwarrented and nothing short but an overexaggeration used to play to the emotions of others.

It is, in fact, because you didn't say anything, therefore I responded to nothing with nothing. You responded to something with nothing, which is immature at best.

No. I think you need to reassess that.



And? They were still points he was arguing, and not something to dismiss with an "lol, n00b," regardless of if you hear them a lot.

Once more...you need to reassess that as my comment can't be construed as a 'lol, n00b'.

I would agree with you here.

Well it is a no brainer.



No, he was bringing up good points -- Gitmo =/= Auschwitz. That was what he was saying, and he was, in fact, supporting his argument.

Have I called gitmo a concentration camp? No.


I do not consider myself to be a genius by any means, or necessarily "liberal," no. And no, they were not railing accusations at all, they were, in fact, good points, that you dismissed simply because you disagreed with it and heard it a lot.

Really? Like the statements about being taken in by the ebil media etc?

Now, don't get me wrong, what is happening at Gitmo is completely wrong -- I love Due Process, and they're not getting it -- but comparing Gitmo to the Nazi Concentration/Extermination camps is unwarrented and nothing short but an overexaggeration used to play to the emotions of others.

Once more. I have not said Gitmo is a concentration camp.

Once more...you need to reassess that as my comment can't be construed as a 'lol, n00b'.

It can, as you completely dismissed the argument by calling him a sheep.

Well it is a no brainer.

Quite.

Have I called gitmo a concentration camp? No.

No, you have not. However, what you did do is completely dismiss his argument against such a comparison, and through dismissal you are implying that he is wrong that they aren't.

Really? Like the statements about being taken in by the ebil media etc?

Sorry, I should have said most.

It is a concentration camp. They come in three main types: detainment(US), labor(USSR), and death (Germany).

It is a concentration camp. They come in three main types: detainment(US), labor(USSR), and death (Germany).

Again, I didn't deny the fact it is technically a concentration camp. But calling it such is only a gimmick to play at emotion, as most people immediately equate "concentration camp" with the KZL of Nazi Germany or the GULAG of the USSR.

Again, I didn't deny the fact it is technically a concentration camp. But calling it such is only a gimmick to play at emotion, as most people immediately equate "concentration camp" with the KZL of Nazi Germany or the GULAG of the USSR.

Because it's so different? Round random people up, lock them up without trial? It IS wrong. It IS a concentration camp. You can call it Tanya, it's still wrong. Calling a pig a chicken won't make it lay eggs!

Calling a pig a chicken won't make it lay eggs!

Well there was that one time...

'Arbeit macht frei'

Again, I didn't deny the fact it is technically a concentration camp. But calling it such is only a gimmick to play at emotion, as most people immediately equate "concentration camp" with the KZL of Nazi Germany or the GULAG of the USSR.

"Well technically I assaulted this person, but don't call it that because it makes me look like I wasn't provoked"

"Well technically I assaulted this person, but don't call it that because it makes me look like I wasn't provoked"

THANK YOU!

"Well technically I assaulted this person, but don't call it that because it makes me look like I wasn't provoked"

The problem with that analogy is that provokation holds no standing.

However, the emotional connotation of words do hold standing, and so far I have yet to meet anyone calling Gitmo a concentration camp that hasn't been trying to play on the emotions attached to the memories of the KZL.

The problem with that analogy is that provokation holds no standing.

However, the emotional connotation of words do hold standing, and so far I have yet to meet anyone calling Gitmo a concentration camp that hasn't been trying to play on the emotions attached to the memories of the KZL.

Doesn't make it any less a concentration camp.

Because it's so different? Round random people up, lock them up without trial? It IS wrong. It IS a concentration camp. You can call it Tanya, it's still wrong. Calling a pig a chicken won't make it lay eggs!

I don't recall the United States systematically killing them, or making them do forced labour, or any of that fun stuff.

And when did I ever say it wasn't wrong?

Doesn't make it any less a concentration camp.

Again, I never said it wasn't one. What I am saying is that I haven't seen anyone call it a concentration camp without the purpose of playing to the emotional memories of the KZL.

What I am saying is that I haven't seen anyone call it a concentration camp without the purpose of playing to the emotional memories of the KZL.

I just did.

I don't recall the United States systematically killing them, or making them do forced labour, or any of that fun stuff.

A concentration camp is a place where people are held for an indeterminate amount of time without trial.

Are they being held there for an indeterminate amount of time? Yes.

Are they being held there without trial? Yes.

Then it is a concentration camp!

A concentration camp is a place where people are held for an indeterminate amount of time without trial.

Are they being held there for an indeterminate amount of time? Yes.

Are they being held there without trial? Yes.

Then it is a concentration camp!

Are you sure you're not just playing to the emotional memories of the KZL? Apparently, that's what we're all doing by calling the American's concentration camp a concentration camp, instead of a Visitor's Lounge or some other untruthful euphemism.

Are you sure you're not just playing to the emotional memories of the KZL? Apparently, that's what we're all doing by calling the American's concentration camp a concentration camp, instead of a Visitor's Lounge or some other untruthful euphemism.

An appeal to emotion is when we call it Auschwitz.

But the fact remains that the original tribunal system was deemed illegal by the US Supreme Courts for being in breach of the constitution, the US Bush Administration has set it up again this time so that the process itself cannot be questioned, and is designed to be kept up and running until Bush's term expires.

Their is no right to confront your accuser, and can be executed based on hearsay, confidential(any information deemed by Bush to be such, meaning the defense cannot see the evidence used against them). Essentially the tribunal itself is controlled by the Bush administration, and has no independence from judiciary to executive, in other words the guilty verdict is already decided, and the inmates are kept in solitary confinement and 'interrogated' for years so the tribunal can 'gather evidence' they didn't have in first place to convict them.

I just did.

Well, thar ya go. :p

An appeal to emotion is when we call it Auschwitz.

Well, considering you said they weren't really that different, you just, in effect, did.